According to this article the ICC are considering calling in Heratio and his CSI Miami team to aportion blame in the Darryl Hair inspired, Pakistani ball-tampering scandal. Actually, they are merely thinking of appointing real forensic investigators.

Is Heratio, or his less stylish and humble real-world likeness, really going to be able to provide magical evidence/answers that 26 cameras at The Oval could not conjure? Surely, a sane and logical conclusion can be arrived at by simply viewing the condition of the ball. Any experienced cricketer is able to decipher the difference between a normal, 57 over old scuffed cricket ball and one that has been tampered with.

Why is it that the ICC continues to propagate these daft suggestions, when the real solution is simple and efficient? All that is required is to examine the TV footage again in minute detail for any evidence of untoward behaviour and do the same with the ball to deduce whether there are, in fact, any marks or abrasions that smell fishy.

This straightforward process will enable the adjudicator(s) to decide, without doubt, whether there is any truth to Darryl Hair’s allegations. You can read my feelings on the “real truth” here.

The ICC can do itself a huge favour by not setting a precedent of conducting code of conduct hearings as if they were murder trials. Lets keep all this in perspective, gentlemen.

Subscribe and Viralize

According to this article the ICC are considering calling in Heratio and his CSI Miami team to aportion blame in the Darryl Hair inspired, Pakistani ball-tampering scandal. Actually, they are merely thinking of appointing real forensic investigators.

Is Heratio, or his less stylish and humble real-world likeness, really going to be able to provide magical evidence/answers that 26 cameras at The Oval could not conjure? Surely, a sane and logical conclusion can be arrived at by simply viewing the condition of the ball. Any experienced cricketer is able to decipher the difference between a normal, 57 over old scuffed cricket ball and one that has been tampered with.

Why is it that the ICC continues to propagate these daft suggestions, when the real solution is simple and efficient? All that is required is to examine the TV footage again in minute detail for any evidence of untoward behaviour and do the same with the ball to deduce whether there are, in fact, any marks or abrasions that smell fishy.

This straightforward process will enable the adjudicator(s) to decide, without doubt, whether there is any truth to Darryl Hair’s allegations. You can read my feelings on the “real truth” here.

The ICC can do itself a huge favour by not setting a precedent of conducting code of conduct hearings as if they were murder trials. Lets keep all this in perspective, gentlemen.